Gustav Theodore Fechner

Pendahuluan

Biografi
Buku 2012 Gustav Theodor Fechner (1801–1887) was born in southeastern Germany,
the son of a Lutheran pastor. Fechner’s father was a free-thinking person who had shocked
his congregation by an apparent lack of faith: he installed a lightening conductor on the top of
his church’s steeple, rather than relied on prayer to God toprevent a lightening strike. Like
Weber, Fechner studied medicine at the University of Leipzig, but never qualified as a
medical practitioner. Fechner was philosophi- cally informed and made a significant
contribution in softening the boundary between empiricism, naturalism and science
(Heidelberger and Klohr, 2004). In addition, Fechner is credited with two main achievements.
First, he extended Weber’s discovery that the ratio of JND to stimulus intensity is constant.
Fechner examined what he called ‘Weber’s law’ in many different modalities and found that
the same rule applied. Weber’s law can be written as:

Gustav Theodor Fechner buku 2014 2

Gustav Theodor Fechner (1801–1887), the major proponent of psychophysics,
attempted to explore more fully the relationships between sensations and percep- tions. He
labeled this movement through his Elemente der Psychophysik (Elements of Psychophysics;
1860), which was designed to be an exact science of the functional relations between the
body and the mind. Moreover, Fechner’s psychophysics was constructed as an attack on
materialism. This goal is of interest because of the im- plied assumptions behind his
psychophysics. Specifically, he did not believe that the notions of science and the mind are
necessarily mutually exclusive; there is no com- pelling reason to reduce the mind to
materialism (as in physiology) in order to study mental operations scientifically. Rather, in
the tradition of German philosophy, he acknowledged the essential activity of the mind and
proposed an empirical science of the mind that allows the relative increase of bodily, sensory
stimulation to serve as the measure of the mental intensity of experiences.
Fechner was born in a small village in southeastern Germany, the son of the local
church pastor. At age 16, he began to study medicine at the University of Leipzig and
received his degree in 1822. Fechner’s interest shifted to physics, and he remained in Leipzig
to study, supporting himself by translating, tutoring, and giving occasional lec- tures. In 1831,
he published a paper on the measurement of direct current, using the re- lationships published
by Georg Ohm in 1826. Fechner was appointed professor of physics at Leipzig in 1834, and
his future seemed secure. His interests began to move toward problems of sensations, and by
1840 he had published research on color vision and subjective afterimages. At about this time
Fechner had what might be called today a nervous breakdown. He had overworked,
exhausting himself, and he also damaged his eyes by gazing at the sun during his research on
afterimages. Fechner’s collapse seemed total, and he resigned his position at the university to
live in seclusion for 3 years.
 Fechner recovered, but his illness and confinement had a profound effect on him. He
emerged from his crisis committed to the spiritual aspects of life, and renewed his religious
convictions. He was convinced of the existence of both mind and matter, and believed that
the materialism of science, exemplified by prevailing sensory physiology, is a distortion. For
the rest of his life, he published on wide-ranging topics. In addition to psychophysics, he
attempted to formulate an experimental esthetics, and even pro- posed a solution to the
problem of determining the shape of angels.
His contributions to psychophysics are his most important works. After pub- lishing
two short papers on the subject, his Elemente appeared in 1860. This work was not widely
recognized at first, but did attract the attention of two important lead- ers in German
psychology—Helmholtz and Wundt. Any overview of Fechner’s psy- chophysics must begin
with the concept of limen, or threshold, which originated with Herbart and was developed by
Weber. The notion of threshold is a quantitative ex- pression that has two applications. The
first usage refers to the minimal amount of physical energy needed in a stimulus for it to be
detected by the observing subject, which was termed the absolute threshold. The second
usage refers to the minimal amount of change in physical energy required for sensory
detection.
Fechner began with the relationship expressed in Weber’s Law:
ΔR = K R
Here, using the German symbols (R = Reiz = stimulus), Fechner expressed Weber’s
findings that the ratio of the change in stimulus value (ΔR) to the absolute value of the
stimulus (R) is equal to a constant. This constant is a measure of the second usage of
threshold, which Fechner called the just noticeable difference ( jnd.) in stim- ulus intensity
detected by the subject. Fechner then related the magnitude of an ex- perienced sensation (S)
to the magnitude of the stimulus using the jnd., or k, by the following relationship:
S = k log R
Quadrant B of Figure 1 shows Fechner’s empirically derived function for the
relationship between the magnitude of the stimulus value (ordinate axis) and the strength of
the sensation (abscissa). It is possible to extend Fechner’s reasoning be- yond his empirical
demonstration, and quadrants A, C, and D of Figure 1 attempt to represent some of the
hypothetical relationships within Fechner’s approach. For ex- ample, the relationship between
stimulus intensity and sensation that could occur in quadrant A would describe the
nondetection of stimuli present, which relates to the subthreshold of attention. Quadrant C
depicts possible sensory experiences in the absence of physical stimulation, and quadrant D
describes nonsensory experiences of nonstimuli. The former (C) might define hallucinations;
the latter (D) could be a definition of dreams. Although this interpretation may be pushing
Fechner’s concep- tualization beyond his intention, it is fascinating that his views of the
relationship be- tween sensations and stimuli include a complete framework within the active
model of the mind prevalent in German philosophy. Indeed, Fechner was very much a part of
the intellectual climate of his contemporary Germany.
Fechner proposed three fundamental methods to determine thresholds. The first was
called the method of just noticeable differences, wherein the subject is asked to detect or
respond to minimal change in stimulus values. The second was called the method of right and
wrong cases, or the method of constant stimuli, in which the subject has to judge repeatedly
which of two stimuli is the more intense. The third, the method of average error, requires
subjects to adjust stimuli until they are equal. These techniques effectively estimate the major
variables in psychophysical studies, and similar procedures are still employed in
psychological investigations.
To judge by Fechner’s stated goals of antimaterialism, he probably would not be very
pleased with his own contributions to psychology, which have been largely methodological.
However, without trying to begin a new disciplinary study, he established a systematic area of
investigation that no longer fitted neatly into sensory physiology or physics. Others who did
intend to define a new scien- tific discipline of psychology recognized the significance of
Fechner’s psy- chophysics and readily adopted it.
Pokok Pikiran 1
Psychophysics buku 2012
If R = the stimulus intensity
and if dR is the JND for the stimulus intensity then
dR/R = a constant
He then used a mathematical procedure to create Fechner’s law, which is
S = k log R,
Where S is the psychological sensation, which is equal to a constant (k) times the logarithm
of the physical stimulus intensity (Fechner, 1966).
Fechner’s second achievement was to systematize the methods commonly used in
psychophysics to determine thresholds. These methods are (a) the method of limits, where
stimulus intensity is adjusted by the experimenter, starting either high or low in the sequence,
and noticing where the participant reports he or she notices a change, (b) the method of
constant stimuli, where the experimenter presents a random sequence of stimuli either just
above or just below the thresh- old, and (c) the method of adjustment where the participant
adjusts the stimulus intensity up or down until the threshold is reached. Fechner’s work forms
the basis for modern psychophysical measurement (Stevens, 1961a, 1961b).
An illness struck Fechner in middle life, brought on by excessive work, including deep
depression. His recovery came suddenly in October 1843, and he embarked on writing books
reflecting a deep spiritual conviction, suggesting that conscious- ness pervaded the whole
world (panpsychism) and that when dead a person’s spirit rejoined the universal spirit
(Fechner, 1904/2005).
In addition to developing the methodology of psychophysics, Fechner also pioneered an early
form of psychometric measurement. Psychophysics measures the perception of objects that
also have a physical measurement. For example, the perception of heaviness is a
psychological sensation. Weight can be measured in grams and is therefore a physical
measurement. By contrast, psychometrics meas- ures the perception of objects that have no
physical representation – i.e. where psychological perception cannot be compared to a
physical measure. Fechner devel- oped a method for assessing the aesthetic quality of objects.
There is no physical measure of aesthetics but Fechner was able to measure the beauty of an
object by asking people to rank different objects in terms of their beauty (Fechner, 1871).
Although psychology and psychical research were very different activities in the early
history, this separation was not complete. Fechner’s (Fechner, 1904/2005) The Little Book of
Life After Death (see Chapter 4) reflected a deep spiritual conviction and Hall (see earlier in
this chapter) had also written a book on religion (Hall, 1917) as well as founding the Journal
of Religious Psychology. However, neither author tried to link their religious conviction to
scientific investigation. One of the early psychologists who researched parapsychology,
amongst other more conventional topics, was Gerard Heymans (1857–1930) who set up the
first psychology laboratory in the Netherlands at the University of Groningen in 1892.
Heymans also studied human character and suggested an early individual difference measure,
based on a tripart distinction between variation in (a) emotional responsiveness (similar to the
modern concept of neuroticism), (b) activity (having some similarity to extraversion) and (c)
what he referred to as after effects (Van der Werff, 1985).

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Pokok Pikiran 2 2013

The Method of Limits Fechner re- ferred to this method as the method of just no- ticeable
differences (jnd). A researcher named Delezenne had used it in tests of tonal intervals and
Weber had as well in research on weights, touch, and vision (see Fechner, 1860/1966, p. 62).
The method of limits consists of presenting a standard stimulus along with variable or
compari- son stimuli of greater and lesser value than the standard. The comparison stimuli are
presented in ascending and descending series. For example, a standard weight of, say, 100
grams may be pre- sented along with a comparison weight of 105 grams. As you can guess,
it’s easy to detect a dif- ference between these two weights. In a descend- ing series,
subsequent comparison weights of 104, 103, 102, and 101 grams may be presented with the
standard weight. Then, an ascending se- ries may include comparisons of 100, 101, 102, 103,
and 104 grams. In each series, the experi- menter can assess the point at which a difference is
no longer detected or the point at which the dif- ference is first noticed. The average for
several ascending and descending series defines the jnd.
This method also applies to absolute thresh- olds. In this case, single stimulus values are pre-
sented in ascending and descending series. For example, tones of 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 Hz
may be presented in an ascending series and the task is to report when the tone is first
detected. In a de- scending series, starting above threshold (e.g., 25, 24, 23, and 22 Hz), the
participant must specify the frequency at which the tone is no longer heard. Fechner believed
that the method of limits is the method of choice for preliminary studies but that other
methods are superior for more rig- orous studies (see Fechner, 1860/1966).
The Method of constant stimuli
Fechner referred to this method as the method of right and wrong cases. In this method,
compari- son stimuli are coupled with the standard stimulus in a random fashion. The
participant’s task is to report whether the comparison stimulus is equal to, greater than, or
weaker than the standard, or alternatively, detected or not detected. For abso- lute thresholds,
single stimulus values above and below threshold are presented randomly. The participant
simply reports whether the stimulus is detected. The method of constant stimuli avoids
certain errors commonly associated with the method of limits. For example, errors of ha-
bituation (i.e., falling into the habit of saying that one stimulus is of greater or lesser value
than the other) are easily established in a graded series. Such errors are eliminated when
comparison val- ues are randomized.
The Method of Average Error
Sometimes called the method of adjustment, the method of average error permits the partici-
pant to manipulate a comparison stimulus until it appears to match a standard. Following the
adjustment, the difference between the standard and the comparison stimuli can be measured.
For example, a standard might consist of a light of a given brightness. The comparison could
be a light source activated by a variable switch that permits the participant to adjust
brightness. The brightness of the comparison stimulus can be adjusted until it appears to
match the brightness of the standard. Normally, several ascending and descending series are
employed and a mean is determined. Thus, in one series, the comparison starts at a higher or
brighter value and is adjusted downward, and in a subsequent series, the com- parison starts
at a lower or dimmer value and is adjusted upward.
Although Fechner’s methods generated criticism (Adler, 1998; Michell, 1999), his work had
wide application and became standard in training experimental psychologists. Fechner raised
issues more than a century ago that still resonate in modern psychophysics research and
signal detection theory (Adler, 1998; Link, 1994; Murray, 1993). Contemporary
psychologists use variations of Fechner’s methods when investi- gating problems as divergent
as perception of air quality to the discrimination capacity of a particu- lar species. Although
Fechner’s dream of solving the mind–brain problem proved too ambitious, he did create the
foundation for an experimental psy- chology. On occasion, in the history of science, a major
research goal goes unrealized even as other fortunate benefits emerge through produc- tive
accident.

Fechner, Gustav Theodor (1801–1887) His Elements of Psychophysics, one of the great orig-
inal classics in psychology, set forth a systematic approach to psychophysics. He proposed
several early psychophysical methods and helped lay the conceptual and methodological
foundations for the new discipline of psychology.
Fechner’s law An integration of Weber’s formula expressed as S = k log R, where S is a
mental sen- sation and R is a stimulus magnitude. Thus, accord- ing to the law, a mental
sensation is a logarithmic function of the stimulus multiplied by a constant.
Pokok Pikiran buku 2014 1
4).
Like Herbart, Fechner (1801–1887) employed the concept of threshold in his work. More
impor- tant to Freud, however, was that Fechner likened the mind to an iceberg,
consciousness being the smallest part (about 1/10), or the tip, and the unconscious mind
making up the rest. Besides bor- rowing the iceberg analogy of the mind from Fechner, Freud
also followed Fechner in attempt- ing to apply the recently discovered principle of the
conservation of energy to living organisms. Freud said, “I was always open to the ideas of G.
T. Fechner and have followed that thinker upon many important points” (E. Jones, 1953, p.
374).
By showing the continuity between humans and other animals, Darwin (1809–1882) strength-
ened Freud’s contention that humans, like nonhu- man animals, are motivated by instincts
rather than by reason. According to Freud, it is our powerful animal instincts, such as our
urges for sexual activity and willingness to be aggressive, that are the driving forces of
personality, and it is these instincts that must be at least partially inhibited for civilization to
exist.

At least as early as Fechner, there had been philosophical speculation about how the two
hemi- spheres related to conscious experience. Sperry’s work certainly energized such
questions (for a fasci- nating example, see Jaynes, 1976). Sperry himself had a lifelong
interest in the mind–body (brain) problem and how that problem relates to human values, and
many of his publications, especially his later ones, reflected those interests (see, for exam-
ple, Sperry, 1970, 1980, 1982, 1988, 1991, 1992, 1993). Sperry believed that consciousness
emerges from brain processes and, once emerged, has a causal relationship to behavior. Thus,
Sperry was an interactionist concerning the mind–body rela- tionship. He believed (some say,
as we will see in Chapter 19, incorrectly) that by correlating mental events directly to brain
processes, he avoided dual- ism. In his Nobel address, Sperry (1982) said,
[I]t remains to mention briefly that one of the more important indirect results of the
split-brain work is a revised concept of the nature of consciousness and its fundamen- tal
relation to brain processing.... The key development is a switch from prior non- causal,
parallelist views to a new causal, or “interactionist” interpretation that ascribes to inner
experience an integral causal control role in brain function and behav- ior. In effect, and
without resorting to dualism, the mental forces of the conscious mind are restored to the brain
of objective science from which they had long been excluded on materialist-behaviorist
princi- ples. (p. 1226)

Buku 2015 1
Fechner’s Elements of Psychophysics Fechner was aware of Weber’s research on thresh-
olds, but did not realize its significance until after his insight of 1850. The breakthrough for
Fechner was the conviction that sensations could be subjected to exact measurement by
assuming that jnd’s were subjectively equal in magnitude. Thus weights of 30 and 33 grams
are just noticeably different, as are weights of 60 and 66 grams. The differences in weight
between the two pairs of stimuli are 3 and 6 grams, respectively. Psychologically, however,
the difference between 30 and 33 feels the same as (i.e., is subjectively equal to) the
difference between 60 and 66, according to Fechner.
Fechner’s assumption of equal jnd’s was challenged almost immediately, and the
mathematical relationship he developed was shown to be true only under limited
circumstances. No matter. The endur- ing legacy of his Elements of Psychophysics was his
systematization of the methods used to establish thresholds, which are still in use both in the
laboratory and in such applications as vision and hear- ing tests. These are known today as
the methods of limits, constant stimuli, and adjustment.4 Consider them in the context of a
hearing test. In the Method of Limits, a stimulus is presented that is well above threshold and
then gradually reduced in intensity until the subject reports that it can no longer be heard.
This is called a descending trial, and it is followed by an ascending trial, in which the
stimulus is first presented below threshold, and then increased until the subject hears it for the
first time. Descending and ascending trials are alternated many times, and the threshold is
calculated as the average of all trials. In the Method of Constant Stimuli, sounds of varying
intensities are presented in a random order, and the subject’s task is to indicate whether or not
they are heard. This method solves a problem with the method of limits, which is a tendency
for the listener to anticipate the place where the threshold lies. In the Method of Adjustment,
the subject directly varies the intensity of the stimulus until it seems to be at threshold.
Ascending and descending trials can be used. Of the three techniques, a study using the
method of adjustment takes the least amount of time, but is the least accurate; the method of
constant stimuli is the most accurate, but takes the longest time (Goldstein, 1996). In an
actual hearing test, the method of limits with descending trials is normally used; “catch trials”
are inserted to prevent subjects from signaling (“I hear it”) when there is in fact no stimulus
presented.
Boring (1963b) referred to Fechner as the “inadvertent founder of psychophysics.” He
believed that Fechner’s main purpose was philosophical—to establish his day view while
defeating materi- alism (the night view). Unfortunately for Fechner, that goal was not
reached, and the philosophical implications of his work were largely ignored. Fortunately for
psychology, though, Fechner’s efforts resulted in the creation of a research program and a set
of methods that enabled others to see what Fech- ner did not—that psychological phenomena
could be subjected to scientific methodology. By creating psychophysics in 1860, Fechner
paved the way for another German physiologist, Wilhelm Wundt, to proclaim a New
Psychology a few years later.
Buku 2018
Gustav T. Fechner also introduced three psychophysical methods into psychology that were
very important to Wilhelm Wundt when he launched psychology as a laboratory- based
experimental science in 1879. The method of just noticeable differences or the method of
limits, as it is called today, requires a person to compare two stimuli with the intensity of one
varied (the comparison stimulus) until the person notices the comparison as just different
from the other or standard stimulus. The data described earlier in this sec- tion and the data
presented in Figure 8.1 have been collected using the method of limits. The method of
average effort or adjustment was Fechner’s second method and requires the person to adjust
or change continuously a variable stimulus until it matches a standard stimulus or appears just
different. This method can be used to measure both the differ- ence limen or threshold (DL,
the just noticeable difference) and/or the absolute limen or threshold (AL, that stimulus
energy that is detected on 50% of the trials with this statisti- cal value set somewhat
arbitrarily by the experimenter and thus can yield different ALs). In the method of constant
stimuli or right and wrong cases, comparison stimuli are paired randomly with a standard
stimulus and the person reports whether the comparison stimu- lus is greater than, equal to, or
less than the standard stimulus or, alternatively detected or not detected. This method is used
to measure both the difference and absolute thresholds, respectively. In all three of Fechner’s
psychophysical methods, repeated measures are taken yielding average values such that both
the difference and absolute thresholds are best thought of as statistical values rather than
fixed immutable values. Some variations of Fechner’s original three psychophysical methods
are still used today, for example, to mea- sure air quality or how much sweetener needs to be
added to a cereal so that it appears just sweeter than unsweetened cereal, which can save the
manufacturer large sums of money when tons of cereal are produced. Lastly, as any seasoned
cook well knows, we use some of Fechner’s methods when adding just the right amount of
herbs, condiments, and/or oils to produce our favorite dishes.
The Weber and the Weber–Fechner laws were the first laws to provide a mathemati- cal
statement of the relationship between the mind and the body based upon systematic
psychophysical methods employed in a laboratory setting. Weber and, especially, Fechner
were revolutionary in their thinking and methods of study pointing psychology in the
direction of examining potential lawful relationships in the field. These laws, along with
Fechner’s three psychophysical methods, the advances in brain localization, nerve physiol-
ogy, and philosophy stressing empiricism and associationism, provided the fundamental
calculus to launch the new science of psychology (Fechner, 1966/1860).
Inti pemikiran fechner
Buku 2015 1
Method of Adjustment Method of psychophysics, described by Fechner, in which the subject
directly controls a physical stimulus, adjusting it until it is just barely detected.
Method of Constant Stimuli Method of psychophysics, described by Fechner, in which
stimuli of varying physical intensities are presented in random order.
Method of Limits Method of psychophysics, described by Fechner, which alternates
ascending trials (stimulus is first below threshold, then increased until detected) and
descending trials (stimulus is first well above threshold, then decreased until no longer
detected).
Kritik
2014 ke 1
Wundt’s Use of Introspection
To study the basic mental processes involved in immediate experience, Wundt used a variety
of methods, including introspection. Wundt’s use of introspection bore little resemblance,
however, to how the empiricists and sensationalists used it to study ideas and association.
Wundt distinguished between pure introspection, the relatively unstruc- tured
self-observation used by earlier philosophers, and experimental introspection, which he
believed to be scientifically respectable:
Experimental introspection made use of laboratory instruments to vary the condi- tions and
hence make the results of internal perception more precise, as in the psycho- physical
experiments initiated by Fechner or in the sense-perception experiments of Helmholtz. In
most instances saying “yes” or “no” to an event was all that was needed, without any
description of inner events. Sometimes the subject responded by press- ing a telegraph key.
The ideal was to make introspection, in the form of internal perception, as precise as external
perception. (Hilgard, 1987, p. 44)

Almost everything in Principles can be seen as a critical evaluation of what James perceived
Wundt’s approach to psychology to be. James (1890/1950) was especially harsh in the
following passage:
Within a few years what one may call
a microscopic psychology has arisen in Germany, carried on by experimental methods, asking
of course every moment for introspective data, but eliminating their uncertainty by operating
on a large scale and taking statistical means. This method taxes patience to the utmost, and
hardly could have arisen in a country whose natives could be bored. Such Germans as Weber,
Fechner ... and Wundt obviously cannot; and their success has brought into the field an array
of younger experimental psychologists, bent on studying the elements of the mental life,
dissecting them from the gross results in which they are embedded, and as far as possible
reducing them to quantitative scales. The simple and open method of attack having done what
it can, the method of patience, starving out, and harassing to death is tried; the Mind must
submit to a regular siege, in which minute advantages gained night and day by the forces that
hem her in must sum themselves up at last into her overthrow. There is little left of the grand
style about these new prism, pendulum, and chronography-philosophers. They mean
business, not chivalry. What generous divi- nation, and that superiority in virtue which was
thought by Cicero to give a man the best insight into nature, have failed to do, their spying
and scraping, their deadly tenacity and almost diabolic cunning, will doubtless some day
bring about. (Vol. 1, pp. 192–193)
James, of course, was responding to Wundt the experimentalist. If James had been able to
probe deeper into Wundt’s voluntarism and into his later Völkerpsychologie, he would have
seen a remarkable similarity between himself and Wundt. In any case, it was Wundt the
experimentalist who, after read- ing James’s Principles, commented, “It is literature, it is
beautiful, but it is not psychology” (Blumenthal, 1970, p. 238).
Although James appreciated Fechner’s excursions into the supernatural (James wrote a
sympathetic introduction to the English translation of Fechner’s The Little Book of Life After
Death), he did not think much of Fechner’s scientific endeavors, which had so impressed
Wundt (James, 1890/1950, Vol. 1, pp. 534, 549).

Like James, Köhler was highly critical of Fechner and offered psychophysics as an example
of what could happen if measurement precedes an understanding of what is being measured:
Apparently [Fechner] was convinced that measuring as such would make a science out of
psychology.... Today we can no longer doubt that thousands of quantitative
psychophysical experiments were made almost in vain. No one knew precisely what he was
measuring. Nobody had studied the mental processes upon which the whole procedure was
built. (Köhler, 1929/1970, p. 44)
Köhler believed that U.S. psychologists were making a similar mistake in their widespread
accep- tance of operationism (see Chapter 13). He gave as an example the operational
definition of intelli- gence in terms of performance on intelligence tests. Here, he said, the
measurements are precise (as they were in Fechner’s work), but it is not clear exactly what is
being measured. In the quota- tion that follows, note the similarity between Köhler’s
(1929/1970) criticisms of the use of IQ tests and those of Binet (see Chapter 10):

2014 ke 2
This brief description of the major psychophysicists reveals quite different ori- entations. On
the one hand, Fechner studied sensory and perceptual events from the perspective of the
underlying mental activity characteristic of the German tradition. On the other, Helmholtz
studied the same phenomena and developed interpretations consistent with an empirical
orientation, related more to the British tradition. However, both scientists succeeded in
pointing to an area of investigation not easily accommodated in physics, physiology, or
natural philosophy alone, and that was the emerging subject matter of psychology.
Buku 2015 1
The brief quote that opens this chapter comes from the preface of the epoch-making
two-volume Prin- ciples of Physiological Psychology, published in 1873–1874. It was written
by the German most often described as the “founder” of experimental psychology, Wilhelm
Wundt. To claim, as Wundt did, that one is making an “attempt to mark out a new domain of
science” is the kind of statement that separates founders from their contemporaries. Clearly,
Fechner’s work on psychophysics entitles him to a claim as the first experimental
psychologist. We’ve seen, however, that Fechner had other, more philosophical,
purposes—defeating materialism. Thus, as Boring (1950) pointed out, founders are
promoters. They might not be the first to accomplish something, but they are the first to
proclaim that their accomplish- ment breaks new ground. They make important scientific
contributions, but they also have a talent for propaganda. Wundt had that talent.
One indirect effect of Fechner’s Elements of Psychophysics is that it helped launch
the experimental study of human memory. This occurred sometime in the mid-1870s, when a
young German philosopher named Hermann Ebbinghaus (Figure 4.4) stumbled on a copy of
Fechner’s book while browsing in a used bookstore in Paris. Fechner’s demonstration that the
mind could be subjected to scientific methods inspired Ebbinghaus, who was wrestling with
the philosophical problem of the association of ideas at the time.
As a philosopher, Ebbinghaus was thoroughly familiar with the British
empiricist–associationists and their analysis of association processes. As you recall from
Chapter 2, the British philosophers considered association to be an essential component of the
mind’s organizational structure, but they differed over the basic laws of association—for
example, is contiguity sufficient to explain associations (Hartley), or are other principles
necessary (Hume)? For Ebbinghaus, Fechner’s scientific approach to the mind’s sensory
processes apparently triggered a creative leap. If sensations could be measured, why not other
mental processes? Why not associations? Sometime during the late 1870s, Ebbinghaus
became resolved to study the formation and retention of associations scientifically. By the
middle of the next decade, he had produced Memory: A Contribution to Experimental
Psychology (1885/1964). This brief book (123 pages in a 1964 reprinting) inaugurated a
research tradition that continues today and includes results that are still described in
textbooks of general psychology. As Ernest Hilgard pointed out in an introduction to the 1964
reprinting, “[f]or the experimental study of learning and memory there is one source that is
pre-eminent over all others: this small monograph by Ebbinghaus” (Hilgard, 1964, p. vii).